§ 46a-58
- Citation
- § 46a-58
- Parent Document
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 2022-04-26
Other Sections in This Document (128)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch v. Gilbert, 343 Conn. 90 (2022)
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
- § 46a-58
Full Text
3,099 chars§ 46a-58 (a), which, unlike § 46a-60, attaches to a reme-
dies provision that includes economic damages and
attorney’s fees.5 With respect to the second claim, the
trial court disagreed with the branch and concluded
that the state has waived its sovereign immunity as to
prejudgment and postjudgment interest for civil rights
violations.
The branch appealed6 and the commission cross
appealed from the judgment of the trial court to the
Appellate Court, and we transferred the appeal and
cross appeal to this court pursuant to General Statutes
§ 51-199 (c) and Practice Book § 65-2.7 Additional facts
and procedural history will be set forth as necessary.
I
REMEDIES FOR EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
UNDER STATE LAW
The branch’s primary claim on appeal is that the trial
court incorrectly concluded that the commission may
5
Section 46a-86 (c) provides the remedies for violations of, among other
laws, § 46a-58, the general antidiscrimination statute. At all relevant times,
§ 46a-86 (c) allowed for the recovery of economic damages and attorney’s
fees. By contrast, prior to its 2019 amendment, § 46a-86 (b), which contains
the remedies for violations of the employment discrimination statute, § 46a-
60, did not allow for the recovery of economic damages or attorney’s fees.
See Public Acts 2019, No. 19-16, § 7.
6
The complainant has not participated in the present appeal.
7
When an appeal is transferred from the Appellate Court to this court, it
often will be advisable for the parties to seek permission to revise their
briefs accordingly. This approach may be beneficial, for example, when the
ongoing vitality of one of our decisions is in question, insofar as the Appellate
Court lacks the authority to overrule or modify this court’s precedents. See,
e.g., Conway v. Wilton, 238 Conn. 653, 657, 680 A.2d 242 (1996).
In the present case, for example, the commission questioned the ongoing
vitality of Truelove in its briefing to the Appellate Court but did not directly
argue that Truelove should be overruled, presumably because that court
lacks the authority to do so. Following transfer of the appeals and oral
argument, we ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefs to address
directly the question of whether Truelove was correctly decided. See, e.g.,
Blumberg Associates Worldwide, Inc. v. Brown & Brown of Connecticut,
Inc., 311 Conn. 123, 161–62, 84 A.3d 840 (2014). As we explain subsequently
in this opinion, we have determined that the holding in Truelove does not
April 26, 2022 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 41